 |
|
|
|
 The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on Thursday rejected the Obama administration’s revised mandates on contraception.
February 7th, 2013
03:34 PM ET
Catholic Bishops not satisfied with Obama’s contraception compromiseBy Dan Merica, CNN Washington (CNN) – The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops does not support the Obama administration’s revised proposal for providing insurance coverage for contraception, saying it falls short of addressing concerns about religious freedom. In a response to the policy update announced last week by the Department of Health and Human Services, the church leaders said the policy offers “second-class status to our first-class institutions in Catholic health care, Catholic education and Catholic charities.” “Because the stakes are so high, we will not cease from our effort to assure that healthcare for all does not mean freedom for few,” Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, president of the conference, said in a statement. “We will continue to stand united with brother bishops, religious institutions, and individual citizens who seek redress in the courts for as long as this is necessary.” Although the bishops identified the changes as a step in the right direction, they made it clear that they were not satisfied. The proposed guidelines would allow religious-affiliated organizations opposing contraception to opt out of a federal mandate requiring that they provide their employees with insurance coverage for birth control. The policy would give women at non-profit, religious-based organizations, like certain hospitals and universities, the ability to receive contraception through separate health policies at no charge. CNN Belief: Obama proposal would let religious groups opt-out of contraception mandate Following an uproar among religious institutions that didn't want to pay for contraceptives, the administration in March offered several compromise alternatives. The plan unveiled on Friday was a result of that effort. The proposed update continued the administration's attempts to resolve the contentious issue of how non-profit organizations can decline to provide contraception coverage to their employees on religious grounds without facing a penalty. An original mandate on providing contraception was part of the new federal healthcare law spearheaded by Obama, the Affordable Care Act. It required that insurers provide, at no cost to those insured, all forms of contraception approved by the Food and Drug Administration. A number of high profile lawsuits have been filed against the federal government on the issue, including from the craft store giant Hobby Lobby. CNN Belief: Hobby Lobby faces millions in fines for bucking Obamacare A group of 43 Catholic organizations challenged the rules in federal court in May. In Thursday’s announcement, Dolan also said the change in policy showed a “disregard of the conscience rights of for-profit business owners.” As part of the new initiative, groups that are insured - such as student health plans at religious colleges - would be required to let their insurer know that certain participants would like contraception coverage. “The insurer would then notify enrollees that it is providing them with no-cost contraceptive coverage through separate individual health insurance policies,” the HHS statement on the policy said. Although the agency has not estimated final costs of the plan, it said that offering free coverage would actually lower expenses over the long term, partly due to improvement in women's health and fewer childbirths. CNN Belief: Catholic groups sue over federal contraception mandate Because the insurer would be covering the costs, the administration hoped the changes would allow religious organizations morally opposed to contraception to avoid paying for it. The updated rules proposal will be open for public comment through April 8. The administration would then decide whether to make it final. The Catholic Bishops indicated in their statement that they look forward to working with the administration on the final policy. “We welcome and will take seriously the administration’s invitation to submit our concerns through formal comments, and we will do so in the hope that an acceptable solution can be found that respects the consciences of all,” Dolan said.
Next entry »What happened to God in America?
« Previous entryLutheran pastor apologizes for praying in Newtown vigil
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Do you devout Christians believe that if you had been bormn into a Muslim household you would very probably be worshipping Alah?
If you had been born to atheist parents you would very likely be thinking about religion and probalby not accept the bible?
Most of you are only Christians because you were told to believe from a very young age and you find comfort in those beliefs?
This is often repeated and probably statistically true. Most people remain close to the culture they are raised in. It ignores the vast numbers of converts to and from different belief systems though
Bill, grow some balls and stop hedging.
Or else what big man?
@Bill Deacon
You said, "It ignores the vast numbers of converts to and from different belief systems though"
Different belief systems come down to differences in believing how the Easter Bunny lays eggs, not whether it lays them.
Granted Lin. For clarification, I would include the various iteration of non-belief as systems. Otherwise, we could not explain the numbers of folks who have rejected their cultural religious environments for atheism or agnosticism.
@Bill Deacon
You said, "For clarification, I would include the various iteration of non-belief as systems. Otherwise, we could not explain the numbers of folks who have rejected their cultural religious environments for atheism or agnosticism."
There is a major difference between moving from one religion to another, and moving from believing to not believing. Once the spell is broken, I suspect it is permanent (save for the loss of faculties). I rarely, if ever, see children revert back to believing in the Tooth Fairy once they realize it doesn't exist.
The Church had their chance, and blew it, badly. Decades of systematic child molestation, complete with massive coverups, transfers, and BILLIONs in payments, has ruined any chance I would listen to anything the Church has to say.
Child predators have little credibility to speak.
Who really cares what these old pedophiles in dresses think?
It is too bad the bishops don't use that same energy and time to deal with the pedophilia within their own priesthood. They seem more concerned about preventing women from regulating their bodies than they are about the lifetime of harm priests have caused by the many acts of pedophilia.
Well, if birth control is used, less little boys to abuse..no wonder they are against it
How many?
Bill Deacon
How many what? Are you asking how mant bishops, priests and deacons were involved in s8x abuse? I do not think they broke that down into numbers, why don't you do the research and let us know?
I've done it many times from various sources. I think when someone makes a claim they should have to back it up. Don't you?
What claim are you talking about? The LA docu-ments have stated that there were 192 bishops, priests and deacons implicated in the abuse scandal, but did not break the numbers down. If the number is wrong , that is the one I saw in the media, maybe I wasn't clear?
Between 1950-2007 there were 109,694 priest ordained in the United States. There were 4,392 credible abuse claims. this yields a ratio of 4%
But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a little-remembered 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, "the physical seexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."
After effectively disappearing from the radar, Shakeshaft’s study is now being revisited by commentators seeking to restore a sense of proportion to the mainstream coverage of the Church scandal.
According to the 2004 study “the most accurate data available at this time” indicates that “nearly 9.6 percent of students are targets of educator seexual misconduct sometime during their school career.”
As a ratio this is over double. However when you consider that in the 60 year period in question there have been over 60,000,000 public school students, the 9% ratio yields 5 million cases of child seexual abuse in the public school system.
So who really has a problem here?
Two wrongs don't make a right, Bill. It is a religion claiming the high moral ground as usual, so ALL its priests should have spotless records.
Yeah,Terry. I think that is your problem. You have an unreasonable expectation of perfection in this life. Only ever happened once
And it's not two wrongs. It's 4900 wrongs compared to 5 million. If you really cared about children you would be knocking the doors down at your local school district and trying to get them to achieve the kind of safety the Catholic school system provides.
Bill,
If you know anything about crime reporting statistics, (and I do) you know s.e.x crimes are the most under reported. And labeling the confirmed cases as the only "credible" cases is extremely disingenuous. You downplay the churches role in its complicity in the continued crimes. The church was an accessory to child r@pes accross the globe. I realize that if we take any group of people there will be a criminal element within that group. That isn't the issue. The issue is the church you support itself supported the continuation of pedophilia and absolutely wrecked individuals and families. Any secular organization that acted in the way the RCC did would have been abandoned, and rightfully so.
@Bill,
"Between 1950-2007 there were 109,694 priest ordained in the United States. There were 4,392 credible abuse claims. this yields a ratio of 4%
But according to Charol Shakeshaft, the researcher of a little-remembered 2004 study prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, "the physical seexual abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse by priests."
if those numbers are both right and comparing the same thing we're doing some sort of new math. If not you're comparing apples and oranges.
660 million paid out in LA for church's se-x crimes.
This is why I would rather people do their own homework. But no one wants to. They just want to hyperventilate about PRIEST PEDOPHILES! OH MY GOD! When the facts are presented one of two things occurs. The first ala Cheesy is a retreat to the cover up, which is it's own scandal and corrals different dynamics. The other reproach is to suspect the methodology of the statistics. To which I respond "How many cases, priest and bishops are we talking about compared to some other, any other group? You supply the math Sara
@Bill, What I'm saying is obviously we aren't looking at a rate of offense 100 times 4%. Kids spend more time in school, and far more are exposed to teachers than priests, so if you're talking absolute numbers the comparison isn't useful either.
@Bill, I guarantee that if it had happened to one of your loved ones, all your numbers, statistics and percentages wouldn't matter.
"The first ala Cheesy is a retreat to the cover up".
Bill,
Are you really accusing me and others of RETREATING to the cover up as if it is a secondary and just a distraction? The cover up it THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. You are a complete immoral asshat. You can shove your precious pedophilia hiding organization up your ass.
Bill Deacon
I do have a problem with "credible abuse claims". In Boston and Los Angeles, once the scandal comes to light many other victims are willing to tell their stories, same thing with the Boy Scouts, so your numbers maybe the tip of the iceberg. Not to mention that the majority of archdiocese have not been forthright in providing information. I will admit there is probably a bandwagon effect with fraudsters jumping on as golddiggers. This is a worlwide problem, who really knows how wirespread it is?
Right On,
You are absolutely correct. S.ex crimes are very under reported, especially child s.e.x crimes. Add into it that the RCC does everything possible to hide its information on the issue that it has knowledge of. The Catholic church has been so immoral that there is no way it can be trusted to be a leader in morality on ANY issue. The pedophilia cover up is world wide and goes right to the top of the church.
Bill Deacon
Retreat to the cover up, what a crock. I guess the Vatican learned nothing from the scandals in Ireland where priests were slapped on the wrist and allowed to go on and abuse even more victims. Allowing the perps to continue their crimes make the hierarchy complicit, the cover up is as bad as the crime.
"the cover up is as bad as the crime."
It's worse. They should know better.
If the law was demanding that all women immediately begin taking birth control, the bishops might have a leg to stand on.
If they seriously want to curb abortion, birth control is the smartest option. Our world is seriously over populated. We need to curb the population growth. An intelligent solution is to make birth control widely and inexpensively available to all women and teach them how to use it effectively. It will reduce the number of pregnancies, and thereby the number of abortions, and it will afford women the ability to plan their families in a way that will encourage not only family unity, but stability.
.....words
Not to mention the health benefits by preventing the spread of veneral disease.
I don't know why they keep trying to appease these old white male bishops. If any proposal pleased them it would undoubtedly displease almost everyone else, so why not just ignore them and move on.
Look at the pic that accompanies this article. How many white-haired old white males can you stuff in one room? And I thought this past Republican Convention looked like an AARP General Assembly. This is not about religious freedom. As someone who was raised Catholic, I recognize the signs of the same old power-driven hypocrisy that these guys have often displayed since I was a kid. They could never answer many of my most basic questions about God, often telling me that "That's just what we believe," or "That's just the way it is." Sorry, Bishop Dolan, but that lack of intellectual honesty didn't impress me then, and it sure doesn't impress me now.
The Catholic church is being completely rediculous and the gov't should tell them to STFU. No one is making anyone take contraceptives. The Catholic church can't even convince its members to follow its teaching on s.e.x and family planning because their stance is absurd and antiquated. It is a health issue. Religious policy should not be involved in public policy.
You have to be a zealot like Bill Deacon to go along with the bishops. You must be obediant to the dictates of the church, you must not question your belief in the scriptures, you must follow the policies in the catechism, if you do not you are not a true catholic, Bill has repeated this over and over. So ladies you can not control your own bodies and if you end up in an abusive marriage, suck it up, divorce is out of the question. The RCC complains about the loss of freedom OF religion, but does allow freedom IN religion, hypocricy.
Sorry to burst your bubble but I have never said don't question. In fact, I say do question. I have found that when I really question what is going on that the Catholic teaching makes the most sense to me. Granted, it requires I give up my "rights" to rampant promiscuity and abortion but I can live with those losses.
Bill Deacon
How many times have you told a poster that if they did toe the line of the church they are not true catholics, be honest?
did not toe, not did. Ooops
zero
Doing what others tell you to do is not practicing morality. That is just being obediant.
"Granted, it requires I give up my "rights" to rampant promiscuity and abortion but I can live with those losses."
Bill, how many times have you accused someone of a "straw man" argument.
Pot....meet kettle
I don't see how this is a straw man Cheesy? Don't you claim that abortion is a right? I am willing to surrender that right in order to follow the teaching of the church. Perhaps you haven't claimed this but others claim that seexual freedom is a right. I am willing to surrender that right in order to remain faithful to my spouse and avoid the consequences of promiscuity.
Bill Deacon
Well I am glad to see you think abortion is a RIGHT you willinly would give up for your faith, bravo. So many others are unwilling to give up that right, now we are getting somewhere; they also do not want to give up the right to contraception and will pay for the insurance or have the insurance companies cover the cost. Would that be OK in the RCC world, not forcing the religious to spend a dime?
Bill,
The straw man portion of your argument is claiming that when one supports personal autonomy rights one therefore supports abortion and irresponsible promiscuity. I used to have respect for you.
What this all boils down to is an attempt by Catholic bishops to continue their stranglehold on women's reproductive organs. This has nothing to do with "religious freedom" and EVERYthing to do with the belief that women are basically babymaking machines and the property of their menfolk. Their uteruses are worshipped, but the women are dispensible. The bishops' continued opposition to this newest proposal that would offer SEPARATE health policies offering contraception at no charge to women who seek it makes that crystal-clear.
And they wonder why their membership sinks to new lows each year.
Their plan of getting catholics to procreate freely to produce more mindless sheep is backfiring.
Who cares what Papist Pedophiles think?
Yep, stuff like this just validates my decision to leave the church over 20 years ago. Wish these bishops had spent as much time addressing the crime of pediphile priests! We need to tax these clowns
Janet
Wonder how many of those old white guys participated in cover ups in their archdioces as happened in LA?
As a wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican party, the bishops and their Church will always oppose Obama. Ignore these bigots.
HEHEHE your small world view is on display
Hey Catholic dinosaurs, you do know that about 95% of your female members use contraceptives, right?
The earth is being overpopulated you m o r o n s.
.
With all due respect to the Bishops, it seems nothing is ever good enough. The President is trying to work with them and has made several compromises in their direction and they just will not cooperate. Seems to me if you are against abortion, one of the best ways to prevent that is contraception to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Not to mention, women use contraception for medical reasons as well. If these bishops had menstrual periods and the accompanying symptoms (which contraception alleviates), they would be the first ones in line. And why is it okay for insurance to pay for Viagra so some old geezer get his feel good on, but contraception for women, well, that's just wrong. WOW!!!
"With all due respect to Bishops"? What planet have you been living on? Religion doesn't deserve respect in general but these guys are sick, arrogant rapists who deserve to be spit upon.
Obama = baby killer
Peach = troll
Peach = a tasty snack I crave when I get the munchies.
Peach=moron
Obama calls himself a christian but promotes the slaughtering of children through abortion. You can't have it both ways!!
Absolute nonsense.
I hate it when Obama sends his Pro-Abortion storm troopers to my kid's school and distributes all that propaganda encouraing girls to kill babies. All those cartoons that show how much fun it is, those speeches he makes specifically encouraging women to engage in unsafe s.ex...
"Obama's Abortion Brigade! No fetus can beat us!"
Yet the Catholic Church supports the idea of Just War, so it is okay to slaughter people after they are born.
Point 1 – Children aren't aborted. Fetuses are aborted.
Point 2 – The Catholic church recently stated in court that fetuses are not people and have no right to life.
Point 3 – The "christian" god, by virtue of his claimed omnipotence and omniscience, is personally responsible for 200,000 spontaneous abortions each day. Most before the woman even knows she is pregnant. 73,000,000 abortions each year. 3,000,000,000 abortions in the past 40 years. We can't hold a candle to your god.
Point 4 – From 2000 to 2006 you wack-job fundiot religious right (oxymoron) nutters had the perfect storm. You owned the White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court. Yet in those 6 years your religious and political masters did nothing to oitlaw abortion or reverse Roe. Can you figure out why? [Hint – you nutters are being played.]
Since the research shows that 98% of all catholics use or have used birth control, perhaps these nutters time would be better spent getting their own flock in line rather than try and force thier bizarre religious myths into our secular laws.
What research?? AND should we go and jump off bridges because others do?
It's from the Guttmacher Instîtute. Feel free to refute it. Just make sure your refutation uses valid peer-reviewed sources.
And the point is – your ignorant nutter Catholic leaders are hypocrites of the first order.
They are getting the flock in line PW. They are advocating protection of religious freedoms that enable Catholics and others not to contribute to grievous sin.
Sorry Bill, but Catholics have been using birth control since there was birth control. And if anything, more of them are using now than ever before. How, exactly, are your immoral leaders forcing people to do their bidding?
@Bill: They have the individual right to not use contraception. If they wish to use their faith as a basis to legislate what other individuals can or cannot do, they have an obligation to prove that their faith is based in fact. In other words, unless they can prove that their god exists, they cannot make claims of authority based on their assumed knowledge of that gods wants, desires or actions.
No Eric, they do not have the obligation to prove existence of their God. What they have is the right to not contribute to behaviors which oppose their faith.
" They are advocating protection of religious freedoms that enable Catholics and others not to contribute to grievous sin." The Catholics leadership beliefs are not my beliefs on this and there are other Catholics who don't agree with that leadership on this. So drop the and others in terms of sin and kindly not imply they are doing it for what others (open ended) think of as sin.
In addition my understanding that based on passages in proverbs that gluttony is a sin, yet we don't see them not wanting to pay for insulin for people that got diabetes from being obese.
If there is one group that is more dysfunctional and out of touch than Congress it is the Catholic Church. Maybe those Bishops should climb down out of their ivory towers and spend some time in a place the rest of us like to call the real world.
Exactly!!!
Congressmen are elected to enact the will of the people. Bishops are ordained to pronounce the Gospel. The will of the people changes. The Gospel does not. Americans often confuse the two systems.
Purgatory and indulgences anyone?
Sorry Bill but we change the "gospel" whenever we please as it suits us for whatever goals we have. Just look at what I did in the Council of Nicea. What amazes us is that there is anyone left dumb enough to take us seriously.
How wonderfully obscure. Expecting a resurgence of Arianism are we?
It usually takes the Catholic Church a while to catch up with the rest of the world.
After all, it was only in the 1980's that they finally admitted that maybe that Copernicus fella might've had a point.
100 years after Darwin, Pope Pius XII broke down and admitted "Polygenism cannot be taught safely." – meaning Adam and Eve are mythical, not literal.
Widespread, effective contraception has been with us for only a handful of decades. The majority of Catholics use it, especially in the developed world, despite any pontifical puffery. Since the UN has declared that access to contraception is a basic human right, I suspect that the number of users will steadily increase throughout the developing world as well, no matter how many threats of hellfire the missionaries spout.
Then, sometime in the next few generations the Vatican will wake up, calm down, and find a way to reconcile scripture with the use of contraception (not including abortifacients).
Poor Onan got a bum deal.
Excuses that you make only to continue living a life full of sins.. following your own wisdom. You want to sin? God doesn't condemn you. You condenm yourself. Keep lying to yourself if you want. I believe in the teachings of Jesus only.
I don't recall Jesus ever addressing the issue of contraception in any of the gospels. I do recall Jesus saying let he who is without sin cast the first stone. That includes passing judgement on others.
@Vik
Ah yes – the old "God loves you and wants you in Heaven, not in Hell. Just accept His love!"
The truth is that Stalin does not send anyone to the Gulag.
It is those who have hardened their hearts against Him who send themselves to the Gulag through their bourgoise atti/tudes and counterrevolutionary actions.
This was not Stalin's plan at all.
He truly wants everyone to go to the Worker's Paradise and it grieves Him that so many harden their hearts against Him.
But He will not force anyone into the Worker's Paradise against their wishes.
He respects their free will.
So if you don't want to go to the Gulag, just open your heart to the love of Stalin.
But Catholics argued in court just last week that a fetus is NOT a person.
Legally they were correct. What's your point?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/opinion/bruni-a-convenient-morality.html?_r=0
@Bill Deacon
Legally correct, but by their own standard, ethically wrong.
It demonstrates that the church has no qualms about dismissing their own moral code when they find it expedient.
Another example of the Catholic Corporation's pre-occupation with the preservation of its as.sets.
Yes, by their own admission it was a moral error. On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with legally preserving ones assets. Do you? Perhaps the flaw is in the law which provided them safe haven?
Bill Deacon
Have you got a link to the 12000 pages of docu-ments realeased in Los Angeles, I think they have been posted somewhere? You should be intrested in what they reveal. BTW has your archdiocese turned in their secret docu-ments to the authorities? If not, do you not think it is about time to come clean?
It's kind of like the 10 Commandments.
There's nothing wrong with breaking them so long as you're furthering the church's agenda...
"Thou shalt not murder" – well, except for heathens, apostates, witches etc.
Seems the "Catholic" Health Organization's lawyers, have rescinded that statement, about "Fetuses not human". The CHO needed some correction by the Church's Bishops.
Sorry Bill. I called it last week that you ignorant fundiot nutters would attempt to weasel your way out. You nutters don't have an ethical leg to stand on.
Bill Deacon
How would you react if the courts ordered that 10 pages of the LA docu-ments were read at all Mass' (Masses?) in all RCC churches untill every page had been read out to the laity? That would be bad PR but would inform the congregation what the hierarchy has been up to.
Do you think the court would order such a thing? Or more importantly do you think the court should have the power to?
@Bill Deacon,
"On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with legally preserving ones assets. Do you?"
Are you saying that legal rules supersede ethical rules?
Bill Deacon
I think it would be justice to inform the laity what the hierarchy has been doing. I see were you are going, no I do not believe the state should have the power to order such a policy too much interference, Would you agree that all docu-ments in the RCC involving abuse be turned over to the police?
ME II. No, I'm saying the court case should be tried under U.S. law, as it was. I am also saying there is nothing morally hazardous about using existing law to protect oneself. While the lawyers for the hospital used a questionable maneuver, they really only acted in the best interest of their client in a legal manner as they are required to do. I think the Archdiocese was right to censure them and I think if the unborn had rights of personhood in this country or the legal system operated differently things could have been different.
Archdiocese, That is a good question. I suppose the correct answer is that if the District Attorney subpoenas them, they probably should be. Is there a case you know of where that has not happened?
Do you think there is a parish in the U.S. that is not aware of the scandal?
Of course they know, in general, but having a letter read from the pulpit wriiten by one of the victims of what they had to endure would be a powerful reminder of what can happen and did happen.
@Bill Deacon,
" I am also saying there is nothing morally hazardous about using existing law to protect oneself."
I'm not sure I agree. For example, was if morally right to return escaped slaves in the north to their "owners" in the southern US.
Or more analogous, perhaps, is it morally okay for a slave owner to use the law to protect himself from murder charges when he kills a slave?